Telangana High Court
Sri. Shyam Lal Jain vs Smt. Prem Kumari Verma on 2 August, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2380 of 2024
ORDER:
Sri A. Venkatesh, learned Senior counsel representing Ms.
Pratusha Boppanna, learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
petitioners in O.S.No.86 of 2024 on the file of XXVII Additional
Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, filed I.A.No.1391 of
2024 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure
Code, 1908 (CPC). The Court below has passed docket order
dated 24.07.2024 and directed issuance of notice to the
respondents by making it returnable by 19.08.2024. The
aforesaid interlocutory application is still pending and needs to be
heard on 19.08.2024.
3. The two observations of Court below were called in question
by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioners and it is
submitted that in para No.3 of the said docket order, the Court
below at best could have stated that it is not fit case for grant of ex
parte ad-interim injunction. Instead, the Court below stated that it
is not fit case to grant ad-interim injunction as prayed for. In that
SP, J
CRP_2380_2024
event, there was no occasion for the Court below to keep the
interlocutory application pending and post the matter on
19.08.2024. Secondly, the 'Doctrine of lis pendens' flowing from
Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 was applied by
the Court below 'till final disposal of the matter', whereas it is
clear from the judgment of High Court of Bombay in the case of
Prakash Gobindram Ahuja vs. Ganesh Pandharinath Dhonde 1
and the judgment of High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi
in the case of K. Ravi Prasad Reddy vs. G. Giridhar 2, that this
Section could not have been applied. The said arrangement at
best could have been made till 19.08.2024, when the interlocutory
application is pending, and not till final disposal of the matter.
This kind of observations made by the Court below may be
interfered with.
4. Heard the learned Senior counsel for the petitioners at
length.
5. In case, I.A.No.1391 of 2024 is still pending (docket order
dated 24.07.2024, nowhere shows that it is disposed of), the Court
below shall decide the said interlocutory application in accordance
MANU/MH/1952/2016
2022 (2) ALD 357 (AP) (DB)
SP, J
CRP_2380_2024
with law on the basis of relevant parameters for grant of
injunction. The petitioners will be at liberty to rely on the
judgments cited supra before the Court below. The Court below
shall decide the aforesaid interlocutory application in accordance
with law without getting unnecessarily influenced by its previous
order dated 24.07.2024.
6. With the aforesaid observation and without expressing any
views on the merits of the case, this Civil Revision Petition is
disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous
applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________
JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
Date: 02.08.2024
GVR
